I guess prepare for potential kernel rot: https://www.neowin.net/news/linus-torvalds-declares-massive-ai-fueled-code-surges-as-the-new-normal-for-linux/

My condolences.

Github seems to be down a lot, too, although perhaps not their pages part. Perhaps you could try to have just the pages in some other place?

I like that I can read this as you stating you use Atlassian yet hate Gitlab, and the statement still works either way 😅

That makes sense, since Gitlab seems to be trying to challenge Atlassian. In who manages to make worse software…

Lemmy is great and that’s the only place I’m posting.

But yeah, if I’m looking for a past conversation on a niche topic, I’ll probably find something to read on reddit.

Yeah the real fix is probably gonna be the stop killing games movement, since it seems like the issue is more that publishers seem to have forgotten what a purchase is and less so the difference of physical vs digital.

The EU sadly seems to be trying to age restrict us all and to tie that to Android and iOS (with no custom ROM suport): https://leminal.space/post/31858818/21120139

The “archaic devices” framing of the article seems questionable to me. I don’t think a device from around 9 years ago (Ryzen Gen 1) is archaic. While these are going to be low end now they often are still perfectly usable if they were somewhat higher end at the time. They don’t lack anything a modern system should need, which is easily proven by Linux running on them just fine.

Not like the AfD is about to become the most popular party, it’s really very unlike ~1933 for sure, for sure. (/s)

So what does the signed-off-by magically solve here, that doesn’t require either you or the contributor to legally review every line by an LLM? If you’re not a lawyer, is your contributor going to be one?

So do you want to legally review every line by an LLM to see if it meets the fair use criterion, since you have to assume it was probably stolen? And would you do this for a known plagiarizing human contributor too…?

If you had a contributor that plagiarized at a 2-10%, would you really go “eh it has to have a degree of novelty to be a problem” rather than just ban them? The different standards baffle me sometimes.

You can find various rates mentioned here: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3543507.3583199 and here: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/2026/01/ai-memorization-research/685552/

Which I’m guessing they cannot attest, if LLMs truly have the 2-10% plagiarism rate that multiple studies seem to claim. It’s an absurd rule, if you ask me. (Not that I would know, I’m not a lawyer.)

Would you also say that to this lawyer reviewing Co-Pilot in 2026? https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/issues/38072#issuecomment-4105681567

Disclaimer: this isn’t legal advice.

If the accountability cannot be practically fulfilled, the reasonable policy becomes a ban.

What good is it to say “oh yeah you can submit LLM code, if you agree to be sued for it later instead of us”? I’m not a lawyer and this isn’t legal advice, but sometimes I feel like that’s what the Linux Foundation policy says.

If you would have written it yourself the same way, why not write it yourself? (And there was autocomplete before the age of LLMs, anyway.)

The big problems start with situations where it doesn’t match what you would have written, but rather what somebody else has written, character by character.